The New Films staff strive to create a fun and welcoming environment for all users. This forum is a place for discussing the films, which means that you think the films are worth discussing. Constructive criticism (as deemed by the moderating staff) is welcome and encouraged. Bashing of any kind will not be tolerated anywhere outside The Sanctuary thread. See the new rules thread here. Bans can and will be handed out to anyone who doesn't abide by the forum rules.

Eh, I liked Kyp. Jedi that was pals with Han and had a revenge storyline making him the anti-hero of the NJO. That could have went somewhere. It didn't but it was the thought that counts.

Plus I think most people loved the Yavin 4 setting of the Jedi Academy and the tie ins with Tales of the Jedi. Even today on the SWTOR message boards you'll see tons of calls for bringing in Yavin 4 because of the lore Anderson helped establish. I feel like that's part of what's missed by many anti-eu arguments is the sheer pervasiveness of the EU. Millions of people have played the MMO's, the first person shooters and the space flight games. These people may not have preconceived notions about the name of Han's kid(s) but they do have a ton of expectations for how certain aspects of the SW universe better work in the new movies. I personally like the idea of a "Ben Skywalker" and his antagonist/love interest girlfriend. But for the directors to say they are ignoring the EU and writing something new altogether is disingenuous because nearly anyone with a speck of interest in star wars has certainly been influenced by some aspect of the EU.

I'm convinced that they may start off with a blank slate new planet or species, and then as they are writing it realize they're actually describing something they had forgotten from the EU. Then it's just a quick find and replace to change the name to the existing name and make us EU'ers happy.

Millions of people have played the MMO's, the first person shooters and the space flight games. These people may not have preconceived notions about the name of Han's kid(s) but they do have a ton of expectations for how certain aspects of the SW universe better work in the new movies.

Click to expand...

My guess is that most people see computer games as just that--games--and form no real expectations based on games when going to see movies. The average person treats a game as a fun diversion and pays no real attention to the worldbuilding minutiae that geeks like us live for.

It's funny to me that posters have actually quoted "Nothing major should happen" as their ideal for the EU. That's a perfectly valid opinion, but it just seems boring to me. Star Wars has grown well beyond a movie franchise.

Click to expand...

Well, Disney/LFL are trying to sustain a movie franchise. If you doubt this, consider how much money they'll be sinking into the next five SW movies. Let's say we're looking at $250m apiece, including marketing--that's $1.25 BILLION dollars they're sinking into this brand over merely the next six years.

That's a pretty strong argument for this still being primarily a film franchise, even if there is a massive amount of EU material out there.

Click to expand...

Oh, for sure. I'm mostly talking about the state of the franchise before Episode 7 was announced. The thought that the EU should have just sat around publishing novels were nothing major ever happens to the main characters for decades is the lamest idea ever. The previous model struck the right balance for me of having important things happen to major characters, but only VERY rarely.

In our new world of Star Wars movies every year, I agree the films should be the primary vehicle through which the major stories are told.

Oh, for sure. I'm mostly talking about the state of the franchise before Episode 7 was announced. The thought that the EU should have just sat around publishing novels were nothing major ever happens to the main characters for decades is the lamest idea ever. The previous model struck the right balance for me of having important things happen to major characters, but only VERY rarely.

In our new world of Star Wars movies every year, I agree the films should be the primary vehicle through which the major stories are told.

I'm convinced that they may start off with a blank slate new planet or species, and then as they are writing it realize they're actually describing something they had forgotten from the EU. Then it's just a quick find and replace to change the name to the existing name and make us EU'ers happy.

Click to expand...

Well, now we're talking about where it is right now but you're left with a metric ton of EU backlog that people are saying it must be incorporated into Ep. 7. I kinda wanna see something new and unexpected. New kids, no kids, new direction of the galaxy. Walking into the movie should be an unknown. With Han, Leia, Luke & Chewbacca all waiting for me, however brief it may be, on the inside.

Like, for example, let's say everyone making the movie want a young, female, late teens daughter of Luke Skywalker to be the protagonist. That's what they want, that's how they roll. Do they have to suddenly change it to Allana Solo, daughter of dead Sith Lord Jacen, grandson of Han Solo, because that's the way it's been set up by the novels? I don't buy that.

Like, for example, let's say everyone making the movie want a young, female, late teens daughter of Luke Skywalker to be the protagonist. That's what they want, that's how they roll. Do they have to suddenly change it to Allana Solo, daughter of dead Sith Lord Jacen, grandson of Han Solo, because that's the way it's been set up by the novels? I don't buy that.

Click to expand...

I know this makes many of us feel old, but Mark's too old to have a late teen daughter. If Luke did have a teen daughter, then they'd have to have this creepy super young wife story for Luke and that's not what you want.

Unless of course you want the EU concept of Jedi having longer life spans?

Mark is, what, 61? If the daughter is 19, Luke's wife could be 55 or thereabouts and still totally believable both as her mother and the wife of a 61 year old. It's not like a 36 year old woman having a baby with a 42 year old man is inconceivable (excuse the pun).

I know this makes many of us feel old, but Mark's too old to have a late teen daughter. If Luke did have a teen daughter, then they'd have to have this creepy super young wife story for Luke and that's not what you want.

Click to expand...

Not really, I don't think the age Luke's age or the age of his wife (if she's even in it, dying off-screen would make things easier and orphans and single-parents do have a history in Star Wars) factors into much of the viewing audience's expectations. It's certainly a hellova lot easier to glaze over than "Solo grandkid of death Sith Lord dad/son of Han and Leia". Just "older dad, got a late start, was kinda busy after the Death Star II blew up". Much easier.

Mark is, what, 61? If the daughter is 19, Luke's wife could be 55 or thereabouts and still totally believable both as her mother and the wife of a 61 year old. It's not like a 36 year old woman having a baby with a 42 year old man is inconceivable (excuse the pun).

Click to expand...

Yeah, this. And maybe they just had kids late? Even in EU, Luke is 64 and his son is 17; in 26 BBY when Ben was born, Luke would've been 45. Is it so inconceivable that he and his wife could have a child at that age? And it's not even that bad if the daughter is 19 and Luke is 61, because the daughter gains 2 years and Luke loses 3; that means they're actually closer together than Luke and Ben. And Mara's only about 2 years younger than Luke, so she was 43 when Ben was born. It's not that big a deal. My aunt is, I believe, 45 or 46, and she just had her first son. What's the difference?

The fact of the matter is though, Star Wars sells. Seriously, you could quite possibly adapt the Crystal Star and you'd still be raking in millions. They're going to make money either way so it seems pointless to overwrite everything and potentially offend the people who have been pushing your franchise forward in the years that you haven't been producing movies.

The fact of the matter is though, Star Wars sells. Seriously, you could quite possibly adapt the Crystal Star and you'd still be raking in millions. They're going to make money either way so it seems pointless to overwrite everything and potentially offend the people who have been pushing your franchise forward in the years that you haven't been producing movies.

Click to expand...

New movies would crank up the potential to sell more merchandising tie-ins. The en-masse exodus of people who are so offended by the changes wrought by an non-EU compatible Episode 7 would probably not have much of any financial detriment since there's a big shiny movie driving people towards the merch.

The fact of the matter is though, Star Wars sells. Seriously, you could quite possibly adapt the Crystal Star and you'd still be raking in millions. They're going to make money either way so it seems pointless to overwrite everything and potentially offend the people who have been pushing your franchise forward in the years that you haven't been producing movies.

Click to expand...

You can break these things. If Ep7 alienates audiences by having an opaque and contrived implicit continuity between it and ROTJ, the gross for the next film (i.e. the first spinoff, which is already a gamble) could be closer to Prometheus numbers than Avengers numbers. And then what?

The fact of the matter is though, Star Wars sells. Seriously, you could quite possibly adapt the Crystal Star and you'd still be raking in millions. They're going to make money either way so it seems pointless to overwrite everything and potentially offend the people who have been pushing your franchise forward in the years that you haven't been producing movies.

Click to expand...

New movies would crank up the potential to sell more merchandising tie-ins. The en-masse exodus of people who are so offended by the changes wrought by an non-EU compatible Episode 7 would probably not have much of any financial detriment since there's a big shiny movie driving people towards the merch.

Click to expand...

Which implies that people would also buy things if it adhered to the EU.

Yes, it is. But that doesn't mean anything; I'm sure 40-something ladies have babies all the time.

Click to expand...

I was 35 when I had my youngest and that's far from being unusual, although I was considered "high risk" as well. I can think of about ten women that I know personally who had babies at 40 or later, and that's just in my tiny corner of the world.

Luke could have a daughter in her late teens pretty easily. I don't have any strong stake in this teen protagonist being his daughter but the possibility is there, and honestly I would feel older if she turned out to be his grandchild.

The fact of the matter is though, Star Wars sells. Seriously, you could quite possibly adapt the Crystal Star and you'd still be raking in millions. They're going to make money either way so it seems pointless to overwrite everything and potentially offend the people who have been pushing your franchise forward in the years that you haven't been producing movies.

Click to expand...

You can break these things. If Ep7 alienates audiences by having an opaque and contrived implicit continuity between it and ROTJ, the gross for the next film (i.e. the first spinoff, which is already a gamble) could be closer to Prometheus numbers than Avengers numbers. And then what?

Click to expand...

Not exactly. The bigger point is that ultimately the revenue of the spinoffs will be a result of the *quality* of the new movies, not the backstory to them. People are going to go see this first one regardless and if it's good they'll keep seeing movies. I doubt very few people will say, "huh, screw this I don't want to see it because I don't know x." More than likely people either won't think about the backstory and just watch the movies like they did already with the prequels or second become interested in the EU and then invest more money in learning about the backstory.

Not exactly. The bigger point is that ultimately the revenue of the spinoffs will be a result of the *quality* of the new movies, not the backstory to them. People are going to go see this first one regardless and if it's good they'll keep seeing movies. I doubt very few people will say, "huh, screw this I don't want to see it because I don't know x." More than likely people either won't think about the backstory and just watch the movies like they did already with the prequels or second become interested in the EU and then invest more money in learning about the backstory.

Click to expand...

Well, this very discussion has centred around how weighty the EU story has been. For that reason, audiences won't be able to gloss over the backstory if it fits snuggly around the EU. In addition, the average response to "This movie you bought a ticket to requires you to read several novels to make full sense of it" is likely to be "I feel ripped off," not "Cool, more books to read!"

Not exactly. The bigger point is that ultimately the revenue of the spinoffs will be a result of the *quality* of the new movies, not the backstory to them. People are going to go see this first one regardless and if it's good they'll keep seeing movies. I doubt very few people will say, "huh, screw this I don't want to see it because I don't know x." More than likely people either won't think about the backstory and just watch the movies like they did already with the prequels or second become interested in the EU and then invest more money in learning about the backstory.

Click to expand...

Well, this very discussion has centred around how weighty the EU story has been. For that reason, audiences won't be able to gloss over the backstory if it fits snuggly around the EU. In addition, the average response to "This movie you bought a ticket to requires you to read several novels to make full sense of it" is likely to be "I feel ripped off," not "Cool, more books to read!"

Click to expand...

My point being that if they produce a quality movie that doesn't make the viewers feel that way then it won't matter if they know the backstory or not. For example, you didn't need to know the entire backstory of Episode 4 to enjoy the film. That's the kind of thing I want. I want them to respect the EU but be able to produce a movie where you don't need to know the backstory of the characters beforehand, a movie where they can introduce the little things in the backstory that you need to know. Again going back to Episode 4, we had no idea what a Jedi Knight was or who Luke's father was but through Obi Wan we were able to find that out. I think it can work the same way with the new films. For Chewie you can throw it in the intro, "Many friends have been lost and many friends have been gained, etc. whatever." For Jacen you can basically have a mentor type character explaining to Allana or whoever how not to end up like him.

Which implies that people would also buy things if it adhered to the EU.

Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain people buy Star Wars merch if there's a new movie out because, "hey, I just saw Star Wars, here's a book about Star Wars! I liked that movie". And so forth. Not "I will now buy Star Wars merch because the movie I just saw adhered to the EU so I want more." You slap a Star Wars label on something when a movie is out, they're gonna pick it up. People bought Jar-Jar merch when Ep. 1 came out. Punting the EU would not affect the financial benefits of spin-off merchandise because the influx of dollars when there's a movie in theatres would outweigh that.

Which implies that people would also buy things if it adhered to the EU.

Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain people buy Star Wars merch if there's a new movie out because, "hey, I just saw Star Wars, here's a book about Star Wars! I liked that movie". And so forth. Not "I will now buy Star Wars merch because the movie I just saw adhered to the EU so I want more." You slap a Star Wars label on something when a movie is out, they're gonna pick it up. People bought Jar-Jar merch when Ep. 1 came out. Punting the EU would not affect the financial benefits of spin-off merchandise because the influx of dollars when there's a movie in theatres would outweigh that.

Click to expand...

But that's exactly my point! people will buy things regardless. If they don't screw with the EU they will go out and by things that currently exist within the EU after seeing the films and the new stuff they put out. My point is that Disney wants to make money and they will make the same amount of money whether or not they use the EU so why would even risk alienating some of their fans when they can literally please everyone and make hella bank.

My point being that if they produce a quality movie that doesn't make the viewers feel that way then it won't matter if they know the backstory or not. For example, you didn't need to know the entire backstory of Episode 4 to enjoy the film. That's the kind of thing I want. I want them to respect the EU but be able to produce a movie where you don't need to know the backstory of the characters beforehand, a movie where they can introduce the little things in the backstory that you need to know. Again going back to Episode 4, we had no idea what a Jedi Knight was or who Luke's father was but through Obi Wan we were able to find that out. I think it can work the same way with the new films. For Chewie you can throw it in the intro, "Many friends have been lost and many friends have been gained, etc. whatever." For Jacen you can basically have a mentor type character explaining to Allana or whoever how not to end up like him.

Click to expand...

This really isn't analogous to the situation with ANH, because that was the first time audiences were getting to know these characters. A better analogy would be the gap between ANH and ESB, where very little happened, or between TPM and AOTC, where an entire 10 years passed without any major events happening. Even ROTS was set up so that nothing of significance happens between it and ANH--Luke, Leia, Obi-Wan, Vader, Palpatine, Yoda, etc., are exactly where you expect them to be in the OT after seeing ROTS.

Like it or not, Han and Leia's kid turning to the dark side and killing Luke's wife is a pretty major series of events. Having that happen offscreen between Episode VI and Episode VII (i.e. the next chapter in the SW saga) makes no sense at all

Like it or not, Han and Leia's kid turning to the dark side and killing Luke's wife is a pretty major series of events. Having that happen offscreen between Episode VI and Episode VII (i.e. the next chapter in the SW saga) makes no sense at all

Click to expand...

But is it really? Let's say the movie is in 50-55 ABY. How often do you trudge up terrible memories that you've since moved on from. Same thing with Chewie, if he died 25-30 years before it's not something you would commonly bring up with your family and it doesn't warrant being mentioned on-screen.